Mark Strong Sr. listens to his attorney address Justice Nancy Mills during a motion hearing at York County Superior Court in Alfred on Thursday.

Lawyer: 'Johns' cut deal to testify against Strong

By Jennifer Feals

jfeals@seacoastonline.com

January 24, 2013 - 5:11 PM

ALFRED, Maine — The attorney representing Mark Strong, charged with conspiring to run a prostitution operation in Kennebunk, alleged in court Thursday that “johns” charged in the case were offered lesser punishments in exchange for testifying against his client. A prosecutor said one alleged john visited the suspected prostitute “42 times.”

Daniel Lilley, representing Strong, 57, of Thomaston, also alleged that the hard drive on which his client had evidence of an investigation into the Kennebunk Police Department has vanished, said he is planning to use allegations of retaliation by the police department against his client in trial, and is seeking to have all but 13 counts against Strong dismissed.

Justice Nancy Mills held a hearing Thursday on motions in the trial of Strong, 57, of Thomaston, who is facing 59 counts — 12 counts of promotion of prostitution, one count of conspiracy to commit the crime of prostitution, one count of conspiracy to commit the crime of violation of privacy, and 45 counts of violation of privacy.

Jury selection for Strong's trial has been underway but was halted Thursday, after the Supreme Judicial Court ruled the process should have been conducted in public.

The trial for Strong, who has pleaded not guilty, could last three weeks. Prosecutors allege he conspired with Alexis Wright, 30, of Wells, to tape her sexual encounters with men without their knowledge. They say the two ran a prostitution operation out of Wright's former Kennebunk Zumba studio and a nearby office space for more than a year-and-a-half.

On Thursday Lilley argued that the counts of invasion of privacy against Strong should be dismissed since the individuals who allegedly engaged in prostitution came to Wright's business to commit a crime, and therefore, should not expect privacy.

“The johns, or patrons of prostitution, went there to commit a crime and in fact, they've pled guilty and are on the witness list, so they are criminals. Minor. But they are criminals,” Lilley said. “I don't believe that anybody can make a rational argument that people who are breaking the law, namely sex for money, are entitled to privacy so they can commit their criminal acts. There is no precedent for it.”

Approximately 60 men have been charged with paying Wright for sex, including 21 who have pleaded guilty. A total of 18 men who have pleaded guilty are included in the state's list of potential witnesses.

The law surrounding privacy violations is in effect in private places where one may reasonably expect to be free of surveillance, Lilley said, but it does not apply to “bordellos, whorehouses or the like.”

Assistant District Attorney Patrick Gordon said both the Constitution and state statutes can protect a person's privacy rights whether or not they are engaging in illegal activity. The question in this case, he said, is whether the individuals expected privacy.

“Where a person goes to engage in sexual activities is a place where they expect to be free from surveillance, whether or not what they are doing is criminal,” he said.

Gordon said all the counts of invasion of privacy against Strong are similar in that they include an alleged client arriving at either Wright's residence, Zumba studio or nearby office space and staying for anywhere from “30 minutes to several hours.”

The frequency of client visits, he said, ranges from “one to two times,” to 42 visits.

“I think our largest number is 42 times,” he said. “It's that high.”

Mills did not rule on Lilley's motion to dismiss the counts of invasion of privacy, saying she had to study the issue further.

Lilley began the hearing with a request for a record of “inducements, promises, compensation, leniency, and/or rewards” that prosecutors may have offered to 18 men who have pleaded guilty to paying Wright for sex and are listed by the state as potential witnesses. Lilley told the judge that he has heard from attorneys for suspected “johns” that they were told if they plead guilty to one county of engaging a prostitute, that the state would not pursue additional counts in exchange for testifying against Strong.

“Some of them have pled guilty to one count, but yet the evidence would seem to suggest several criminal acts, potentially,” Lilley said. “That promise and reward would suggest bias or at least potential bias on the part of the witness.”

Gordon said the individuals charged were fined based on the number of times they allegedly engaged in the act of prostitution. The offer made to those who pleaded guilty, he said, is that even if they had engaged in the act a number of times, the state would only bring one count against them.

“If they come in and plead guilty they will not receive more charges, but they will receive a different fine based on how many times they engaged,” Gordon said. “They were not told whether they would be called (as witnesses) or not.”

Prosecutors said they sent letters to individuals suspected of engaging in prostitution, which would include any plea deals offered. Mills told prosecutors to provide those letters to Lilley.

Prosecutors have filed their own motions, including motions to prohibit discussions of Strong's financial difficulties or an investigation he was allegedly conducting into the Kennebunk Police Department. Strong and Lilley maintain that the charges against Strong have been in retaliation by the police department for Strong's investigation, which they say uncovered an affair between Audra Presby, the department's lead investigating officer, and her then-superior, Nick Higgins, as well as an officer-involved shooting.

The shooting, which occurred in 2011, was investigated by the Attorney General's office and ruled justified, while Higgins resigned and Presby was disciplined at the time of the affair in 2009. Both were covered by the Coast Star at the time.

Lilley also raised allegations that Presby sexually assaulted one of Higgins children in 2011. He said the allegations were reported by a counselor and have been “swept under the rug by the KPD.”

A judge ruled at the time that the allegations were unfounded.

The judge sided with the state in stating that Strong's financial situation is not relevant to the case, but said the discussion of Strong's investigation and alleged retaliation is allowed.

“The timeline favors the defendant, because these alleged situations with regard to Officer Presby and other instances with the Kennebunk Police Department occurred prior to the instance with Mr. Strong,” Mills said. “At this point this is cross examination material with regard to Officer Presby, certainly with regard to her credibility, with regard to bias.”

Lilley says that a hard drive containing evidence of Strong's investigation was seized from his property, but has since vanished. He said an officer with the Maine Crimes Division of the State Police is on tape stating there is a hard drive that was taken to the Kennebunk Police Department. Lilley said it has not been catalogued like other pieces of evidence.

“As far as we can tell, this particular computer or hard drive was taken, we believe to the Kennebunk Police Department by Officer Presby or one of her colleagues. It had the investigation that Mr. Strong was doing on the Kennebunk Police Department, and it was never to be found again.”